On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 17:21:38 +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > * Frank KÃster > > | That's correct from the point of view of a buildd, or of a developer > | running a sid machine. But it is not correct for backporters: Imagine > | that packages are added to build-essential, or versioned dependencies in > | it are bumped to a higher version number. Then a package without > | Build-Dependencies, or with Build-Dependencies that can be fulfilled in > | stable, might still not build in a stable environment. > > Which is why build-essential in sarge would be updated to depend on > debhelper now, so packages in etch could get rid of debhelper build-deps. > People backporting from unstable to oldstable are on their own, but I > think that's ok and not a very interesting use-case.
I'm confused. One making backports from sid to woody should backport a package in such a way that it is buildable with woody's build-essential. --Ken Bloom -- I usually have a GPG digital signature included as an attachment. See http://www.gnupg.org/ for info about these digital signatures. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
